Here’s the thing: It just doesn’t “follow,” and the whole rationale for passing 230 in the first place was that it doesn’t follow. This gets said so much that I think people have lost sight of what an irrational non-sequitur it is.
https://twitter.com/27celtics/status/1341851495831105536
“Platforms aren’t responsible for speech by their users. But if they choose to take down pornography, they should be liable for defamatory speech by their users.” What? Why? That’s moon logic. Those things have nothing to do with each other.
Also there’s no universe in which getting rid of 230 yields “accountability” for “disinformation,” because disinformation as such isn’t actionable, and you really, really wouldn’t want it to be.
Like, consider a concrete example. Twitter user A tweets that she was sexually harassed by her boss. The boss claims the tweet is false & defamatory, and threatens to sue Twitter unless they remove it. Under what conditions, if any, should Twitter be liable?
We can have an interesting debate about that. But one answer that I think we can rule out as obviously wrong, bordering on insane, is: “It depends whether Twitter deletes pornographic photos.”
“OK, OK, taking down porn shouldn’t make them liable. But if they put a fact check banner on the president’s tweets about election rigging, THEN they should incur liability for a totally different user’s tweet about sexual harassment.” Why? That’s still bananas!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
